I am searching for a word that can describe an object or process as having both bad and good elements.

I realize this is a repeat of this previous question, but I do not believe the suggestions answer my question;

Egregious, the proposed answer by the OP, is not a common enough word (anyone I have asked has had to look it up), nor does it mean precisely what I'm after,

Sick is a word that can be used in both good and bad contexts. It does not actually mean "both good and bad".

The context I am working is biological, specifically cognitive impairment (such as dementia). In a publication I am working on currently, I would like to describe the role of inflammation as having both good and bad roles (depending on the situation).

I can think of possible sayings that might apply, for example "swings and roundabouts" or "bitter-sweet", but again these do not seem formal enough.

Is there a word that fits the context? "Inflammation is a double-edged sword..." but more scientifically!

@Lynn I agree, and they would have to be very stuffy indeed: searching Google Scholar for "double-edged sword" returns 84,000 articles, the very first of which is from the prestigious journal Science.
–
CameronSep 10 '12 at 16:50

2

But "egregious" means "incredibly bad". It does not at all mean "can be either good or bad".
–
JaySep 10 '12 at 19:55

As the definition you quote indicates, "dualism" is a theory in theology. It is unlikely that the original poster wants to say that inflammation causes or is caused by competing good and evil spirits.
–
JaySep 11 '12 at 14:01

1

@Jay while you have a point, the definition of the word is not confined to the domain of theology.
–
MDeSchaepmeesterSep 11 '12 at 15:32

I think this may be the easiest to immediately interpret what I'm getting at. I will obviously need to explain the concepts I'm talking about initially, but to refer back to the "dualistic nature of the inflammatory response" would work very well indeed. Thanks.
–
LukeSep 11 '12 at 16:30

@Luke glad to be of help although to be honest I'm surprised that you would call my answer the best. English isn't even my native language and I don't study it or anything. Personally I think you should seriously consider ambivalent and bipolar.
–
MDeSchaepmeesterSep 11 '12 at 17:44

2

@Mario: I'd use dualistic before ambivalent or bipolar. Maybe it needs to be used with a little bit of caution, but I think you've made a good suggestion. Don't sell yourself short.
–
J.R.Sep 11 '12 at 23:29

Perhaps ambivalent would be of some use; it seems like a reasonable extension of the second meaning:-

Psychology . of or pertaining to the coexistence within an individual
of positive and negative feelings toward the same person, object, or
action, simultaneously drawing him or her in opposite directions.

Edit I've just noticed this was also suggested by Karthik at the previous question.

Ambivalent by its correct definition is perfect. Unfortunately, far too many English speakers (including native speakers) think it merely means "undecided" or "not caring one way or the other."
–
KRyanSep 10 '12 at 19:17

This is good. Along the same lines, ambiguous could also work - it is a little less correct than ambivalent, but it might be more likely to be understood on the first read.
–
alcasSep 11 '12 at 2:09

An equivalent expression to the second idiom as a metaphor is "a double-edged sword". Usually this idiom or metaphor is used to describe something which would exhibit the good and bad simultaneously.
–
KeithSSep 10 '12 at 18:09

"Twofold" means a doubling, not one way and another.
–
KRyanSep 10 '12 at 19:16

Something can be "awesomely good" or it could be "awesomely bad", but that doesn't mean that "awesome" by itself means that it can be both. It's like saying "very".
–
JaySep 10 '12 at 19:58

"I saw Gods power and it was awesome" "The devils works are awesome". "awesomely good" is a tautology.
–
Alexx RocheSep 10 '12 at 20:59

@Jay 's point is that "awesome" does not answer the question. The OP wants a word that specifically connotes "both good and bad". "Awesome" does not specifically connote "both good and bad"; it has a different meaning (impressive or awe inspiring) that does not have the requested connotation.
–
MετάEdSep 11 '12 at 12:34